Back to Search
Start Over
Evaluation of Different Positive End-Expiratory Pressures Using Supreme™ Airway Laryngeal Mask during Minor Surgical Procedures in Children.
- Source :
-
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) [Medicina (Kaunas)] 2020 Oct 21; Vol. 56 (10). Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Oct 21. - Publication Year :
- 2020
-
Abstract
- Background and objectives: The laryngeal mask is the method of choice for airway management in children during minor surgical procedures. There is a paucity of data regarding optimal management of mechanical ventilation in these patients. The Supreme™ airway laryngeal mask offers the option to insert a gastric tube to empty the stomach contents of air and/or gastric juice. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the impact of positive end-expiratory positive pressure (PEEP) levels on ventilation parameters and gastric air insufflation during general anesthesia in children using pressure-controlled ventilation with laryngeal mask. Materials and Methods: An observational trial was carried out in 67 children aged between 1 and 11 years. PEEP levels of 0, 3 and 5 mbar were tested for 5 min in each patient during surgery and compared with ventilation parameters (dynamic compliance (mL/cmH <subscript>2</subscript> O), etCO <subscript>2</subscript> (mmHg), peak pressure (mbar), tidal volume (mL), respiratory rate (per minute), FiO <subscript>2</subscript> and gastric air (mL)) were measured at each PEEP. Air was aspirated from the stomach at the start of the sequence of measurements and at the end. Results : Significant differences were observed for the ventilation parameters: dynamic compliance (PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 3: p < 0.0001, PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001, PEEP 3 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001), peak pressure (PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 3: p < 0.0001, PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001, PEEP 3 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001) and tidal volume (PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 3: p = 0.0048, PEEP 5 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001, PEEP 3 vs. PEEP 0: p < 0.0001). All parameters increased significantly with higher PEEP, with the exception of etCO <subscript>2</subscript> (significant decrease) and respiratory rate (no significant difference). We also showed different values for air quantity in the comparisons between the different PEEP levels (PEEP 5: 2.8 ± 3.9 mL, PEEP 3: 1.8 ± 3.0 mL; PEEP 0: 1.6 ± 2.3 mL) with significant differences between PEEP 5 and PEEP 3 ( p = 0.0269) and PEEP 5 and PEEP 0 ( p = 0.0209). Conclusions : Our data suggest that ventilation with a PEEP of 5 mbar might be more lung protective in children using the Supreme™ airway laryngeal mask, although gastric air insufflation increased with higher PEEP. We recommend the use of a laryngeal mask with the option of inserting a gastric tube to evacuate potential gastric air.
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1648-9144
- Volume :
- 56
- Issue :
- 10
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 33096743
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina56100551